ArticleGeroScience2021
A short digital eye-tracking assessment predicts cognitive status among adults.
Article in GeroScience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Use of the National Institutes of Health Toolbox Cognition Battery in Clinical Populations.Neuropsychology review · 2026Pooled it
- The effectiveness of eye tracking in the diagnosis of cognitive disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Acute Inositol-Stabilized Arginine Silicate Improves Cognitive Outcomes in Healthy Adults.Nutrients · 2021Trial
- AI-Based Measurement Tools for Intrinsic Capacity in Older Adults: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Smartphone eye-tracking with deep learning: Data quality and field testing.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Detecting early stages of Alzheimer's disease using a web-based cognitive battery.GeroScience · 2025Article
- The examination of physical function and cognitive outcomes in middle-to-older high-risk adults: an unsupervised clustering method.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Possibility of screening for mild cognitive impairment via an eye tracking-based cognitive scale.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Construction of a prediction model for Alzheimer's disease using an AI-driven eye-tracking task on mobile devices.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2024Article
- The Potential of Automated Assessment of Cognitive Function Using Non-Neuroimaging Data: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A detection model of cognitive impairment via the integrated gait and eye movement analysis from a large Chinese community cohort.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Associations of an eye-tracking task and pupillary metrics with age and ASA physical status score in a preoperative cohort.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023Article
- Article
- The efficacy and practicality of the Neurotrack Cognitive Battery assessment for utilization in clinical settings for the identification of cognitive decline in an older Japanese population.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- Eye-tracking paradigms for the assessment of mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- Intervention for a Digital, Cognitive, Multi-Domain Alzheimer Risk Velocity Study: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Time-restricted feeding and cognitive function in sedentary and physically active elderly individuals: Ramadan diurnal intermittent fasting as a model.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Cognitive management in a digital world.Aging · 2021Article
- Affective Computing for Late-Life Mood and Cognitive Disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current cognitive assessments suffer from limited scalability and high user burden. This study aimed to (1) examine the relationship between a brief eye-tracking-based visual paired-comparison (VPC) and gold standard cognitive assessments, (2) examine longitudinal stability of the VPC task, (3) determine the ability of the VPC task to differentiate between cognitively normal (CN) individuals and individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Fifty-five adults (n = 44 CN, n = 11 MCI; 56.4 ± 26.7 years) were tested on two occasions, separated by at least 14 days. Visit 1 included VPC, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Digit Symbol Coding test (DSC), and NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery (NIHTB-CB). Visit 2 included VPC, DSC, NIHTB-CB, and dual-task (DT). Significant differences existed between baseline VPC scores for CN and MCI groups (p < .001). VPC scores remained stable over time in both groups (p < .05). Significant associations existed between VPC and MoCA (p < .01), DSC (p < .001), and various NIHTB-CB subtests at both time points. The VPC test significantly predicts cognitive outcomes (p < .05), with age and VPC being the only significant predictors. Additionally, area under the curve (receiver operator characteristic = 0.80) for VPC scores demonstrated good classification accuracy. VPC reliably predicted cognitive status while remaining stable over time and displayed significant associations with gold standard cognitive assessments. VPC is a less burdensome and more scalable assessment than traditional tests, enabling longitudinal monitoring of cognitive status in resource-limited environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.